The Federal Communications Commission voted 3–2 to impose net neutrality rules today, restoring the common-carrier regulatory framework enforced during the Obama era and then abandoned while Trump was president.

The rules prohibit Internet service providers from blocking and throttling lawful content and ban paid prioritization.

“Consumers have made clear to us they do not want their broadband provider cutting sweetheart deals, with fast lanes for some services and slow lanes for others,” FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel said at today’s meeting.

    • scoobford@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      74
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      No reason they should exist in any day and age.

      Companies do not pay per packet. Paying more for more bandwidth or lower latency kind of makes sense because theoretically they may be prioritizing your traffic when the network is under too much load. But sending 16 petabytes costs exactly the same as 1kb in a month, assuming your connection is fast enough to handle 16 petabytes in a month.

      • Trollception@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        True companies do not pay per packet but they do pay for the bandwidth. The more users that use more bandwidth consistently means the ISP needs to invest more money on throughput/links. If you have 100 users and they use 1 mbps on average you can get away with a 100mpbs link. If you have 5 users using 50mpbs on average now you need a gig link. So technically it’s not free but yeah bandwidth caps suck big time. My suggestion would be to pick a place to live near a city with a municipal broadband option.

        • uis@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          6 months ago

          The problem ISPs ask to pay BOTH for bandwidth and for packets. Which is double payment.

          • CleoTheWizard@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Kind of. They’re asking you to pay for maximum possible bandwidth but make no claims about how long you can use that max bandwidth. Packets are only a convenient way to measure a percentage of max bandwidth use over time.

            • uis@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              “You maybe will be able to use advertised bandwidth. As long as we want. Or maybe not.”

        • scoobford@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          6 months ago

          We were supposed to build one here, but AT&T basically owns our city government lol.

          They announced the project wouldn’t be moving forward because they wouldn’t/couldn’t use imminent domain to lay fiber in peoples yards. They’ve used it to build 3 stadiums in the past 20 years, and knock down entire neighborhoods in the process. Literally bulldozed multiple square miles of city.

          I fucking hate it here. We gave the stadium owners a bunch of money this week to renovate their stadium for some reason.

      • LaLuzDelSol@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        6 months ago

        Right but if everyone sends 16 petabtyes a month the internet would collapse. Data caps do absolutely work to reduce bandwidth on a network scale. Bandwidth is measured in mbps. Limit the Mb and you reduce the necessary bandwidth.

        • uis@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          6 months ago

          For context 16 petabytes per month is about(slightly more than) 6 gigabytes per second. Also internet was designed during times when computers were super expensive and 100% utilization was norm.

        • scoobford@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          You already buy “up to” a certain speed. When the network is congested, you just deal with it.

          Trying to make people budget their internet usage is stupid and pointless.

    • Valmond@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      6 months ago

      I have a 186GB 5G monthly limit on my 10€ mobile subscription, then (supposedly) it drops to 4G speed. I’m ok with those kind of limits because they are not there to milk people.

      • JoshuaFalken@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        6 months ago

        I checked the carriers around here and all of them unsurprisingly offer the same thing. 50GB 5G for 50€ that drop to roughly 2G speeds once the limit is reached.

        Almost 20x the cost of your subscription.

      • Jarix@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Meanwhile in canada i have a plan from 2012 that was an unlimited plan they that geta throttled after 5gigs (it has been since upped to 20gigs now)

        If its throttled its throttled to less than 200kbps and is basically useless